Posted on 02/25/2005 12:28:48 PM PST by abu afak
February 24, 2005
The leader of the Lebanese opposition, a sharp critic of Washington foreign policy, says he's changed his view of the U.S. war in Iraq, seeing it now as a catalyst for democratic change across the Arab world.
Walid Jumblatt
Druze Muslim leader Walid Jumblatt, who is calling for an uprising against Lebanon's Syrian occupiers, is almost sounding like a neoconservative, says Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who interviewed him in Beirut Monday.
"It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq," Jumblatt told the Post columnist.
"I was cynical about Iraq," Jumblatt said. "But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world."
Jumblatt said this spark of democratic revolt is spreading.
"The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing," he said. "The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it."
In an exclusive interview with WorldNetDaily Monday, Jumblatt blamed the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri on Lebanese security officials backed by Syria.
Jumblatt said Hariri told him in a meeting two weeks ago he felt they both were in danger.
The Druze leader told WND he is calling for an "uprising for independence" demanding Damascus withdraw its nearly 20,000 troops from the country and urging the current pro-Syrian government to step down.
"We ask all in Lebanon to claim independence from Syria peacefully and democratically," said Jumblatt.
Jumblatt, in conjunction with other major figures of the anti-Syrian movement, put out a statement Friday urging the "dismissal of the government, which has no legitimacy, and the formation of a transitional administration to protect the Lebanese people and ensure the immediate withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon to pave the way for holding free and honest legislative elections."
Don't hold your breath.
Well lets see there is Jeb, Laura and of course the is the father who still has another term comming. And of course the Demos would have us forget Roosevelt who had three terms but there was a war going on then.
Makes me proud of our great country and it's leadership.
Maybe you differ ovcr what "lowering the boom" means. Seems to me that Bush has been doing that for about four years.
Here is one thing that Bush & Co. understand that very few others do, including many Republicans: We either democratize the Middle East or we are finished. "Containment" just isn't an option anymore. Allowing totalitarian/authoritarian dictatorships or monarchies to remain in power there is like refusing to drain a malaria-mosquito laden swamp in your back yard. Sooner or later, the mosquitoes will get in your house and infect you. Creating a peaceful, democratic Middle East will drain the terrorism swamp. But even if we succeed with that, to carry the analogy further, there may still be enough puddles left to breed a terrorist group that still manages to build or get a hold of some nuclear weapons and wipe out some big cities. For all we know, it may already be too late to stop that. But democratizing the place is our only chance.
"Don't ya just love it when a plan comes together.?"
Especially a plan the MSM and the liberal left has done their damdest to dismember.
"We need a third Bush term!"
We aren't likely to get that, but there is a way we can have almost as much fun and the same effect on the blood pressure of the liberal left. All we need is for one of our talented Freepers to create some bumper stickers and yard signs, that read: "Bush in 2008".
It might also get our cars keyed, tires slashed and our houses burned, but what the heck-go for the GUSTO.
There were no term limits in Roosevelt's time either.
Do I detect a hint of sarcasm?
With Freedom, could there finally be peace? One can only continue to pray...
I am now willing to admit that on the current evidence that the President would appear to be smarter than me.
The problem is there is no real central authority that can call this crap off. Lunatics of varying stripes with a relation to Islam is something much different than the type of enemy posed by a national government like the Nazis or the Chinese. Our military strategy for decades was postulated on this traditional view. Islamic terrorism is not capable of defeat under that strategy which will have to become much more diverse in tactics and much more controlled from the local level. This is a very dificult transition our boys must make.
The long-term answer is infiltrating and wrecking these organizations from within. The CIA people were quite good at that sort of thing at one time. But even then there weren't any spooks to speak of in the Middle East who could blend in with the crowd. The lack of spooks who look and speak Arabic/Farsi, etc., is a liability that will take years to overcome so it's going to be a while before we can get inside Al Qaeda & Co.
The short-term strategy, if you can call it "short", is to keep pushing on the dominoes until all the terrorist-sponsoring governments fall. From there on, it's a spooks/special ops show.
He's made a career out of being "misunderestimated."
That is much more difficult with these groups than with other enemies unfortunately. But, fortunately, we have a President who will not stop in his efforts to destroy these enemies.
Bush din't do half bad.
In a conference call with the Democratic leadership today President Bush was quoted as saying "Who's your Daddy now?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.